Rohl (was: yrw$lym)
dwashbur at nyx.net
Sun Sep 26 09:56:51 EDT 1999
I only have one thing to say about this, and then I will not post on
this any further:
> You need to know what the status quo is before questioning it. Egyptology
> is a lot more "hard science" than anything to do with the OT. You find Rohl
> convincing regarding the restructuring of history (as implied by his
> redating of Ramses II), but what do you know about how the status quo
> dating has come about, through Rohl? It would seem so -- defeat at the start.
Ian, I never said a word about Rameses II. You're the one who
keeps bringing him up. If you had bothered to read my original
post on this topic, you would have seen that I specifically said I
wasn't sure about some of his treatments of individual persons, but
that I thought he made his case for the need to restructure the
Third Intermediate Period. That's all I said, and I had really hoped
that intellectual honesty would prevail so that the discussion would
be narrowed to that topic. Obviously, you don't want to do that.
It's clear that, not only are you unwilling to read Rohl before you
start sniping at him, but you aren't even willing to read what I
actually wrote before you start sniping at me. I have better things
"Ich veranlassenarbeitenworken mein Mojo."
More information about the b-hebrew